Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Separation science”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

977 records · Page 55

Solar Dynamics Observatory Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Overview

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.

Morgenstern, Wendy M.↗

MISR Level 1B1 Local Mode Radiance Data (MIB1LM_V1)

The results of two types of processing are included in this product. First, the Radiance Scaling operation converts the camera's digital number output to a measure of energy incident on the front optical surface. The measurement is expressed in units called radiance (energy per unit area, wavelength, and solid angle) as defined by the International Standard (SI). Second, Radiance Conditioning modifies the radiances to remove instrument-dependent effects. Specifically, image sharpening is applied, and focal-plane scattering is removed. Additionally, all radiances are adjusted to remove slight spectral sensitivity differences among the 1504 detector elements of each spectral band and each camera. In addition to the Level 1B1 radiometric product for MISR's Global Mode imagery, there is a separate Level 1B1 product for each high-resolution Local Mode scene. The Radiometric Product contains spectral radiances for all MISR channels (four spectral bands and nine cameras). Each radiance value represents the incident radiance averaged over the sensor's total band response. Processing includes both radiance scaling and conditioning steps. Radiance scaling converts the Level 1A data from digital counts to radiances using coefficients derived in combination with the On-Board Calibrator (OBC) and vicarious calibrations. The OBC contains Spectralon calibration panels which are deployed monthly and reflect sunlight into the cameras. The OBC detector standards then measure this reflected light to provide the calibration. Vicarious field campaigns are conducted less frequently but provide an independent methodology useful for reducing systematic errors. Radiance conditioning removes undesirable instrument effects. Image enhancement is provided by deconvolving the scene with the sensor's point-spread-function. Additionally, in-band scaling adjusts the reported radiances to correspond to a nominal band response profile. This frees the Level 2 software from the need to correct for detector element non-uniformities. No out-of-band correction is done for this product, nor are the data geometrically corrected or resampled at this point. In summary, the Level 1B1 Product contains the Data Numbers (DNs) radiometrically-scaled to radiances with no geometric resampling. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=2000-02-24; Stop_Date=] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=275 m for red band only; Longitude_Resolution=275 m for red band only; Horizontal_Resolution_Range=250 km - < 500 km or approximately 2.5 degrees - < 5.0 degrees; Temporal_Resolution=about 15 orbits/day].

NEAR IR IMAGERY↗

Landsat Data Continuity Mission

The Landsat Data Continuity Mission (LDCM) is currently under development and is on schedule to launch the 8th satellite in the Landsat series in December of 2012. LDCM is a joint project between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS). NASA is responsible for developing and launching the flight hardware and on-orbit commissioning and USGS is responsible for developing the ground system and operating the system onorbit after commissioning. Key components of the flight hardware are the Operational Land Imager (OLI), nearing completion by Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp in Boulder, CO, the Thermal Infrared Sensor (TIRS), being built by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center and the spacecraft, undergoing integration at Orbital Sciences Corp in Gilbert, Arizona. The launch vehicle will be an Atlas-5 with launch services provided by NASA's Kennedy Space Center. Key ground systems elements are the Mission Operations Element, being developed by the Hammers Corporation, and the Collection Activity Planning Element, Ground Network Element, and Data Processing and Archive System, being developed internally by the USGS Earth Resources Observations and Science (EROS) Center. The primary measurement goal of LDCM is to continue the global coverage of moderate spatial resolution imagery providing continuity with the existing Landsat record. The science goal for this imagery is to monitor land use and land cover, particularly as it relates to global climate change. Together the OLI and TIRS instruments on LDCM replace the ETM+ instrument on Landsat-7 with significant enhancements. The OLI is a pushbroom design instrument where the scanning mechanism of the ETM+ is effectively replaced by a long line of detectors. The OLI has 9 spectral bands with similar spatial resolution to ETM+: 7 of them similar to the reflective spectral bands on ETM+ and two new bands. The two new bands cover (1) the shorter wavelength blue part of the spectrum to help with coastal studies and aerosol analyses/atmospheric correction and (2) an atmospheric water absorption band, where the Earth surface is generally not visible, but Cirrus clouds are, to aid in cloud detection and screening. The radiometry of OLI benefits from improved SNR, dynamic range and quantization. OLI is undergoing system testing with a delivery scheduled for Spring 2011. The TIRS is also a pushbroom design and used QWIPS detectors that require cooling to 43K using a cryocooler. It.has two spectral bands, effectively splitting the ETM+ band 6 in half, that can be used as a split window to aid in atmospheric correction. It has nominally 100 m spatial resolution as opposed to the 60 m of Landsat-7 ETM+: TIRS has commenced integration and test, with a delivery to the spacecraft vendor scheduled for Winter 2011-2012. The Orbital spacecraft currently being integrated for LDCM will have improved capabilities for pointing over previous missions. These capabilities will allow the OLI and TIRS instruments to point off-nadir the equivalent of one WRS-2 path to increase the chances of coverage for high priority targets, particularly in the event of natural disasters. Also, the pointing capability will allow the calibration of the OLI using the sun (roughly weekly), the moon (monthly), stars (during commissioning) and the Earth (at 90 deg from normal orientation, a.k.a., side slither) quarterly. The solar calibration will be used for OLI absolute and relative calibration, the moon for trending the stability of the OLI response, the stars will be used for Line of Sight determination and the side slither will be an alternate OLI and relative gain determination methodology. The spacecraft is scheduled to begin integration with the OLI instrument in Summer 2011. The LDCM data processing and archive system (DPAS), located at USGS EROS, generates the products for distribution to users. Like Landsat-7 this includes an image assessment system for characrizing instrument performance and updating calibration parameters. Products will be generated that include the spectral bands from both instruments, terrain corrected and registered to the geoid. Also, like Landsat-7, data products will be distributed at no charge to the user. The current status and plans of the space and ground segments of the LDCM project will be presented along with performance predictions as available. More detailed information on the two instruments is intended to be presented in separate papers.

Markham, Brian↗

The Utilization Profiles of the CCSDS Unified Space Link Protocol (USLP)

The purpose of this paper is to identify the utilization profiles for interfacing the Data Protocol Sublayer using the Unified Space Link Protocols (USLP) (reference 1) with the space link coding procedures as specified in the CCSDS Coding & Synchronization Blue Books (references 2 through 5), used in both telecommand and telemetry applications. This paper describes how the USLP Protocol utilizes the coding and synchronization sublayer to support: a. Direct to Earth (DTE) telemetry links for engineering and science data b. Direct to Earth (DTE) telemetry links for very high rate science data c. Direct from Earth (DFE) command, sequencing and flight software loads d. Space to Space Links (Proximity) utilized by orbiters for data exchange to/from surface bound assets. The CCSDS has divided the functions of the Data Link Layer into two sublayers: the Data Link Protocol Sublayer (DLP-SL) and the Coding and Synchronization Sublayer (CS-SL). The Data Link Protocol Sublayer (DLP-SL) interfaces to the users, accepting the data that is to be transported, on the sending side of the link, and delivering that data on the receiving end. The Transfer Frame is the data unit that is transferred across the Data Link Protocol Sublayer and the Coding and Synchronization Sublayer boundary. The Coding and Synchronization Sublayer (CS-SL) provides the encoding, randomization, and frame synchronization functions that prepares the USLP Transfer Frame for transport across the space link. The CS-SL is divided into 2 processes: 1) The Frame Interface Processes (FIP) performs the interface functions required to prepare the data for delivery to the Coding/Decoding Process (CDP). This process includes prepending a Frame Start Marker to the provided frame, when management has designated that the frame is not to be aligned to the codeblock or when there is no block code used. 2) The Coding/Decoding Process (CDP) performs the forward error correction processes that are used to optimize the performance of the link and minimize the error rate. The CDP creates the symbol stream that is delivered to the Physical Layer. The transfer of the USLP transfer frames across different types of space links is the focus of this paper. The Protocol Data Unit (PDU) that is passed in both directions between the Data Link Protocol Sublayer (DLP-SL) and Coding and Synchronization Sublayer (CS-SL) is the transfer frame. The USLP frame structure provides flexibility that can be constrained by the functions utilized within the CS-SL that prepare the transfer frame for transit. For example, the USLP transfer frame contains a length field that enables the frame to be of variable length but CS-SL under certain conditions may constrain the frame to be fixed in length. This paper describes 5 operational modes available for use by the Data Link Layer to provide data exchange across the USLP space link. These modes are different because different operational requirements apply to vastly different types of space links and thus the communications implementation requirements differ. The environmental issues include the power or energy available, the distance between the end points of the link, the complexity of the equipment available at those end points, the atmospheric conditions and radiometric frequency selection. The CS-SL utilizes different forward error correcting codes supported by specific operational modes to configure the data for transit. This paper describes all of the operational modes in a series of data models which decompose the functionality between the Data Link Protocol Sublayer and the Coding and Synchronization sublayer. The operational modes described are: 1. Uncoded Mode: has been used for short links that contain significant available power to provide an acceptable frame error rate. The frames in this mode can be variable in length and typically use an error detection algorithm (i.e., CRC) to determine if there are errors in the received frame. 2. Convolutional Only Mode: is currently the prime forward error correction coding used for the proximity links. The frames in this mode can be variable in length and typically use an error detection algorithm (i.e., CRC) to determine if there are errors in the received frame. 3. Variable Length Frame Aligned to Variable Length Codeblock (TC): is used for Direct from Earth links were power levels are high and the simple, least complex code i.e., the BCH code is used. This mode has been in use since the early 1970s. The BCH code is a short code and the decoder is easy to implement. 4. Fixed Length Frame Aligned to Fixed Length Codeblock (AOS/TM): was introduced when the concatenated Convolutional and Reed-Solomon Code was formulated to provide significant reduction in link data error rate and the ability to determine if there was an error in the decoded codeblock. The frame is aligned to the codeblock so that there is a one to one relationship of frame errors to codeblock errors without additional error detection coding being added. This mode requires the protocol frames to be the exact size of the message portion of the codeblock. 5. Frames Unaligned to Fixed Length Codeblocks (Currently used for very high rates and space to space links): This mode is currently used for missions that have a very high data rate that can be controlled adaptively as the environment changes and as the next generation operating mode for the proximity link. This mode from a coded data stream point of view is exactly like that described in 4. above, except that the frame need not be aligned to the codeblock. There is no requirement on frame length when using this mode. Thus when using USLP it can be used to support links that require short or long frames. There is also no mandatory requirement that frames cannot be separated by idle data reducing the tight data rate connection requirements between the data link protocol sublayer and the coding & synchronization sublayer. In conclusion, how these operational modes can be put to use in mission operational scenarios is described for Direct from Earth links (DFE), Direct to Earth links (DTE), and Proximity links.

Greenberg, E.↗

Investigating the Simulink Auto-Coding Process

Model based program design is the most clear and direct way to develop algorithms and programs for interfacing with hardware. While coding "by hand" results in a more tailored product, the ever-growing size and complexity of modern-day applications can cause the project work load to quickly become unreasonable for one programmer. This has generally been addressed by splitting the product into separate modules to allow multiple developers to work in parallel on the same project, however this introduces new potentials for errors in the process. The fluidity, reliability and robustness of the code relies on the abilities of the programmers to communicate their methods to one another; furthermore, multiple programmers invites multiple potentially differing coding styles into the same product, which can cause a loss of readability or even module incompatibility. Fortunately, Mathworks has implemented an auto-coding feature that allows programmers to design their algorithms through the use of models and diagrams in the graphical programming environment Simulink, allowing the designer to visually determine what the hardware is to do. From here, the auto-coding feature handles converting the project into another programming language. This type of approach allows the designer to clearly see how the software will be directing the hardware without the need to try and interpret large amounts of code. In addition, it speeds up the programming process, minimizing the amount of man-hours spent on a single project, thus reducing the chance of human error as well as project turnover time. One such project that has benefited from the auto-coding procedure is Ramses, a portion of the GNC flight software on-board Orion that has been implemented primarily in Simulink. Currently, however, auto-coding Ramses into C++ requires 5 hours of code generation time. This causes issues if the tool ever needs to be debugged, as this code generation will need to occur with each edit to any part of the program; additionally, this is lost time that could be spent testing and analyzing the code. This is one of the more prominent issues with the auto-coding process, and while much information is available with regard to optimizing Simulink designs to produce efficient and reliable C++ code, not much research has been made public on how to reduce the code generation time. It is of interest to develop some insight as to what causes code generation times to be so significant, and determine if there are architecture guidelines or a desirable auto-coding configuration set to assist in streamlining this step of the design process for particular applications. To address the issue at hand, the Simulink coder was studied at a foundational level. For each different component type made available by the software, the features, auto-code generation time, and the format of the generated code were analyzed and documented. Tools were developed and documented to expedite these studies, particularly in the area of automating sequential builds to ensure accurate data was obtained. Next, the Ramses model was examined in an attempt to determine the composition and the types of technologies used in the model. This enabled the development of a model that uses similar technologies, but takes a fraction of the time to auto-code to reduce the turnaround time for experimentation. Lastly, the model was used to run a wide array of experiments and collect data to obtain knowledge about where to search for bottlenecks in the Ramses model. The resulting contributions of the overall effort consist of an experimental model for further investigation into the subject, as well as several automation tools to assist in analyzing the model, and a reference document offering insight to the auto-coding process, including documentation of the tools used in the model analysis, data illustrating some potential problem areas in the auto-coding process, and recommendations on areas or practices in the current Ramses model that should be further investigated. Several skills were required to be built up over the course of the internship project. First and foremost, my Simulink skills have improved drastically, as much of my experience had been modeling electronic circuits as opposed to software models. Furthermore, I am now comfortable working with the Simulink Auto-coder, a tool I had never used until this summer; this tool also tested my critical thinking and C++ knowledge as I had to interpret the C++ code it was generating and attempt to understand how the Simulink model affected the generated code. I had come into the internship with a solid understanding of Matlab code, but had done very little in using it to automate tasks, particularly Simulink tasks; along the same lines, I had rarely used shell script to automate and interface with programs, which I gained a fair amount of experience with this summer, including how to use regular expression. Lastly, soft-skills are an area everyone can continuously improve on; having never worked with NASA engineers, which to me seem to be a completely different breed than what I am used to (commercial electronic engineers), I learned to utilize the wealth of knowledge present at JSC. I wish I had come into the internship knowing exactly how helpful everyone in my branch would be, as I would have picked up on this sooner. I hope that having gained such a strong foundation in Simulink over this summer will open the opportunity to return to work on this project, or potentially other opportunities within the division. The idea of leaving a project I devoted ten weeks to is a hard one to cope with, so having the chance to pick up where I left off sounds appealing; alternatively, I am interested to see if there are any opening in the future that would allow me to work on a project that is more in-line with my research in estimation algorithms. Regardless, this summer has been a milestone in my professional career, and I hope this has started a long-term relationship between JSC and myself. I really enjoy the thought of building on my experience here over future summers while I work to complete my PhD at Missouri University of Science and Technology.

Gualdoni, Matthew J.↗